Mozilla and Skype back iPhone jailbreaking

Earlier this month the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) officially requested that the Library of Congress create a DMCA exemption for jailbreaking smartphones to allow the installation of software not approved by the manufacturer. Last week Apple responded with a claim that this would violate iPhone copyrights. Now Mozilla Corporation, developers of the Firefox web browser, and VOIP provider Skype have filed their own comments in support of EFF's position.

Harvey Anderson, Vice President of Mozilla wrote "users who purchase these devices are required to decrypt and modify, or "jailbreak," their phones. This creates a chilling effect on users and innovation. Users do not feel they have the choice of using open source and other legitimately obtained software programs or software they develop on their telephone handsets because they are concerned about breaching the law."

Skype's comments point out that US carriers all claim to be in favor of open wireless networks, while they "continue to employ various means to keep users from using devices and software applications of their choice — from terms of service to the software and firmware loaded on the handsets sold by the carriers."

They argue "An end-to-end network, in which consumer choice is empowered, ensures that innovation occurs at the edges of the network where hundreds if not thousands of application developers and software manufacturers, rather than a handful of wireless carriers, can compete to meet consumer demand."

EFF has also responded to Apple's claim that their iTunes App Store makes jailbreaking unneccessary. They gave numerous examples of software which has been rejected for the App Store, in many cases because it would compete with another product from Apple or one of their partners.

"These examples underscore the fact that there is no copyright-related rationale for preventing iPhone owners from “jailbreaking” their phones, enabling them to interoperate with applications lawfully obtained from a source of their own choosing," wrote EFF's attorneys.

I could understand if people leased their phones from Apple because Apple would still partially own it, but that's not the case. Apple doesn't own the phones and it's the owner's right to do whatever they want with their own phones.

Imagine if Toyota wouldn't allow people to modify their cars. If anything, the ability to modify a product would help increase their sales.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 20 Feb 2009 @ 11:18

The lawsuit is only Apple's way of trying to create a monopoly on the applications that can be run. They do not like the idea of other developers coming up with ideas before they can get their applications on the iTunes store for the consumers to buy.

Originally posted by vballstud: I could understand if people leased their phones from Apple because Apple would still partially own it, but that's not the case. Apple doesn't own the phones and it's the owner's right to do whatever they want with their own phones.

Imagine if Toyota wouldn't allow people to modify their cars. If anything, the ability to modify a product would help increase their sales.

Actually, that is why you sign your contract. You are in effect leasing the phone until your contract is up--then it becomes yours.

They heavily subsidize these phones in exchange for a service contract. Imagine you give an engagement ring to a girl, then she dumps you the next day. Should she keep the ring or at least not pay you for it? This is settled in common law countries and the answer is NO, because it is a conditional gift.

I just noticed that after a couple days.............don't know how that happened. I honestly don't do that intentionally. It's annoying and frankly, people don't care enough about MY PARTICULAR comment to pay attention to it twice.

They heavily subsidize these phones in exchange for a service contract. Imagine you give an engagement ring to a girl, then she dumps you the next day. Should she keep the ring or at least not pay you for it? This is settled in common law countries and the answer is NO, because it is a conditional gift.

Exact same situation.

Heavily subsidize??? That is a lot of crap. I have been involved in contract manufacturing industry for a number of year. Even at the price they are selling you they are making money.

So far as the the ring analogy is concerned what kind of service one should expect!!!!